this post was submitted on 11 Jan 2025
867 points (99.3% liked)
People Twitter
5490 readers
1876 users here now
People tweeting stuff. We allow tweets from anyone.
RULES:
- Mark NSFW content.
- No doxxing people.
- Must be a pic of the tweet or similar. No direct links to the tweet.
- No bullying or international politcs
- Be excellent to each other.
- Provide an archived link to the tweet (or similar) being shown if it's a major figure or a politician.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
It's not just (time now required for task)/(time previously required for task)? So if it normally costs 4 hours to get a jug of water, and we build pipes to make it cost 4 minutes, then it's a 60x increase in efficiency.
Bias: manufacturing engineer
In capitalism, you become more efficient the closer you get to producing nothing while charging infinite dollars to everyone.
If you have to charge 1/60th or less per unit of water and the market size remains the same, your example is less efficient, even if the pipes were free.
From the short-sighted beady eyes of a soulless ghoul running a company whose sole service is to supply water: yes this would be inefficient if it costs more. From someone with just the tiniest imagination: with easier access to water, what else could we do for people?
Once upon a time this type of vision was common, business schools did a fantastic job turning everyone into idiots.
Capitalism; the people who want to provide water as cheaply as possible are out-competed by the people who want to make as much money as possible.